Search

Structural competency is a new curricular framework for training health professionals to recognise and respond to disease and its unequal distribution as the outcome of social structures, such as economic and legal systems, healthcare and taxation policies, and international institutions. While extensive global health research has linked social structures to the disproportionate burden of disease in the Global South, formal attempts to incorporate the structural competency framework into US-based global health education have not been described in the literature. This paper fills this gap by articulating five sub-competencies for structurally competent global health instruction. Authors drew on their experiences developing global health and structural competency curricula-and consulted relevant structural competency, global health, social science, social theory, and social determinants of health literatures. The five sub-competencies include: (1) Describe the role of social structures in producing and maintaining health inequities globally, (2) Identify the ways that structural inequalities are naturalised within the field of global health, (3) Discuss the impact of structures on the practice of global health, (4) Recognise structural interventions for addressing global health inequities, and (5) Apply the concept of structural humility in the context of global health.

IntroductionStructural forces that drive health inequalities are magnified in crises. This was especially true during the COVID-19 pandemic, and minority communities were particularly affected. The University of California San Francisco and Health, Equity, Action, Leadership Initiative jointly sent volunteer teams of nurses and doctors to work in the Navajo Nation during the COVID-19 pandemic. This presented an opportunity to explore how academic medical centers (AMCs) could effectively partner with vulnerable communities to provide support during healthcare crises. Therefore, the aims of this study were to describe volunteers' perspectives of academic-community partnerships by exploring their personal, professional and societal insights and lessons learned based on their time in the Navajo Nation during COVID-19.MethodsWe recruited key informants using purposeful sampling of physicians and nurses who volunteered to go to the Navajo Nation during the spring 2020 COVID-19 surge, as well as hospital administrators and leaders involved in organizing the COVID-19 efforts. We used in-depth qualitative interviews to explore key informants' experiences pre-departure, during their stay, and after their return, as well as perspectives of the partnership between an AMC and the Navajo Nation. We used thematic analysis to systematically identify, analyze and report patterns (themes) within the data.ResultsIn total, 37 clinicians and hospital administrators were interviewed including 14 physicians, 16 nurses, and 7 health system leaders. Overall, we found 4 main themes each with several subthemes that defined the partnership between the AMC and the Navajo Nation. Mission and values incorporated civic duty, community engagement, leadership commitment and employee dedication. Solidarity, trust and humility encompassed pre-existing trust, workforce sustainability, humility and erasure of 'savior narratives.' Coordination included logistical coordination, flexibility, selectivity of who and what traveled to the response and coordination around media response. Workforce preparation and support encompassed understanding of historical context and providing healthcare in limited settings, dangers of inadequate preparation and the need for emotional support.ConclusionThis study provides guidelines which AMCs might use to develop and improve partnerships they have or would like to develop with vulnerable communities. These guidelines may even be broadly applied to partnerships outside of a pandemic response. Importantly, such partnerships need to be built with trust and with an eye towards sustainability and long-term relationships as opposed to 'medical missions'.

Structural competency is a new curricular framework for training health professionals to recognise and respond to disease and its unequal distribution as the outcome of social structures, such as economic and legal systems, healthcare and taxation policies, and international institutions. While extensive global health research has linked social structures to the disproportionate burden of disease in the Global South, formal attempts to incorporate the structural competency framework into US-based global health education have not been described in the literature. This paper fills this gap by articulating five sub-competencies for structurally competent global health instruction. Authors drew on their experiences developing global health and structural competency curricula-and consulted relevant structural competency, global health, social science, social theory, and social determinants of health literatures. The five sub-competencies include: (1) Describe the role of social structures in producing and maintaining health inequities globally, (2) Identify the ways that structural inequalities are naturalised within the field of global health, (3) Discuss the impact of structures on the practice of global health, (4) Recognise structural interventions for addressing global health inequities, and (5) Apply the concept of structural humility in the context of global health.

The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates the critical need to reimagine and repair the broken systems of global health. Specifically, the pandemic demonstrates the hollowness of the global health rhetoric of equity, the weaknesses of a health security-driven global health agenda, and the negative health impacts of power differentials not only globally, but also regionally and locally. This article analyses the effects of these inequities and calls on governments, multilateral agencies, universities, and NGOs to engage in true collaboration and partnership in this historic moment. Before this pandemic spreads further - including in the Global South - with potentially extreme impact, we must work together to rectify the field and practice of global health.

BackgroundGlobal health academic partnerships are centered around a core tension: they often mirror or reproduce the very cross-national inequities they seek to alleviate. On the one hand, they risk worsening power dynamics that perpetuate health disparities; on the other, they form an essential response to the need for healthcare resources to reach marginalized populations across the globe.ObjectivesThis study characterizes the broader landscape of global health academic partnerships, including challenges to developing ethical, equitable, and sustainable models. It then lays out guiding principles of the specific partnership approach, and considers how lessons learned might be applied in other resource-limited settings.MethodsThe experience of a partnership between the Ministry of Health in Nepal, the non-profit healthcare provider Possible, and the Health Equity Action and Leadership Initiative at the University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine was reviewed. The quality and effectiveness of the partnership was assessed using the Tropical Health and Education Trust Principles of Partnership framework.ResultsVarious strategies can be taken by partnerships to better align the perspectives of patients and public sector providers with those of expatriate physicians. Actions can also be taken to bring greater equity to the wealth and power gaps inherent within global health academic partnerships.ConclusionsThis study provides recommendations gleaned from the analysis, with an aim towards both future refinement of the partnership and broader applications of its lessons and principles. It specifically highlights the importance of targeted engagements with academic medical centers and the need for efficient organizational work-flow practices. It considers how to both prioritize national and host institution goals, and meet the career development needs of global health clinicians.